FFT Senior Communities, Inc. v. Town of Canandaigua

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

FFT Senior Communities, Inc. v. Town of Canandaigua

96 A.D.3d 1396, 945 N.Y.S.2d 892

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 8, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 96 A.D.3d 1396 (FFT Senior Communities, Inc. v. Town of Canandaigua) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

FFT Senior Communities, Inc. v. Town of Canandaigua, 96 A.D.3d 1396, 945 N.Y.S.2d 892 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Ontario County (Kenneth R. Fisher, J.), entered December 20, 2010 in a proceeding pursuant to RPTR article 7. The order reduced the tax assessments for petitioner for the years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, and 2008-2009.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Respondents appeal from an order in which Supreme Court reduced the tax assessments of petitioner for the tax years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, and 2008-2009. Both respondents and petitioner presented expert testimony regarding the highest and best use of the property. We note that, in this bench trial, although our authority is as broad as that of the trial court (see DonVito v State of New York, 182 AD2d 1070, 1071 [1992]), we nevertheless will not disturb the decision of the fact-finding court on appeal unless it is obvious that the court’s conclusions could not have been reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Farace v State of New York, 266 AD2d 870, 870 [1999]). We conclude that the court properly applied the principles enunciated in Matter of Miriam Osborn Mem. Home Assn. v Assessor of City of Rye (80 AD 3d 118 [2010]) with respect to the entrance fees charged by petitioner and that, under the circumstances, there is no reason to disturb the court’s determination with respect to the assessment reductions. Present—Scudder, P.J., Centra, Lindley, Sconiers and Martoche, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Ontario County (Kenneth R. Fisher, J.), entered December 20, 2010 in a proceeding pursuant to RPTR article 7. The order reduced the tax assessments for petitioner for the years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, and 2008-2009.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Respondents appeal from an order in which Supreme Court reduced the tax assessments of petitioner for the tax years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, and 2008-2009. Both respondents and petitioner presented expert testimony regarding the highest and best use of the property. We note that, in this bench trial, although our authority is as broad as that of the trial court (see DonVito v State of New York, 182 AD2d 1070, 1071 [1992]), we nevertheless will not disturb the decision of the fact-finding court on appeal unless it is obvious that the court’s conclusions could not have been reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Farace v State of New York, 266 AD2d 870, 870 [1999]). We conclude that the court properly applied the principles enunciated in Matter of Miriam Osborn Mem. Home Assn. v Assessor of City of Rye (80 AD 3d 118 [2010]) with respect to the entrance fees charged by petitioner and that, under the circumstances, there is no reason to disturb the court’s determination with respect to the assessment reductions. Present—Scudder, P.J., Centra, Lindley, Sconiers and Martoche, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

96 A.D.3d 1396, 945 N.Y.S.2d 892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fft-senior-communities-inc-v-town-of-canandaigua-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack